Alternatives to Transit City, the Spadina Extension, Yonge Extension, Etc.

[scarberiankhatru]

I am sick of the narrow-minded transit vision that most Torontonians have of subway or nothing. And the biggest failing in my mind is not the lack of a well developed subway network, but the lack of a well developed regional rail network that spans the GTA. This has made Torontonians equate subways with regional rail leading them to believe that if there's no subway in their area, then transit must be inadequate. It's a terrible waste that we have all these rail corridors that criss-cross the region and provide excellent coverage, but we choose to run only a handful of trains each day on most of these lines.

Don't confuse the occasional forum post with a notion that most Torontonians have a subway or nothing vision and that this has any real effect on what does or does not get built. If anything, what we've seen with the recent explosion of funding is that a few influential individuals in the city think everyone else has a subway or nothing mentality, so they just went to the other extreme and said "no subway for you!"

Part of building a proper useful balanced transit network is building more subways, though, and this is undeniable. The 416 can't revamp a GO line alone...better GO service cannot be anything but a regional effort. People think areas without good subway service have inadequate transit not because the subway network is so good but because almost everything else is so bad (disastrous streetcar service, disastrous traffic mucking up bus routes, and virtually no practical GO service). GO is currently useless to about 99% of the 416 but our attitudes towards GO in the 416 would change in about 5 seconds should the lines be improved (and adding a 5th train per day to a line, or a 12th car, is not an improvement).

 

[doady]

GO is a very successful system and they have the highest cost recovery in North America and they want even higher. So they probably prefer to keep doing what they have always been doing, and so regional rail does not fit into their plans.

 

[unimaginative2]

Well regardless of their fare recovery, we're never going to have decent transit in the GTA if GO or whoever takes over those services don't stop designing their entire service around 9 to 5 commuters.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Well regardless of their fare recovery, we're never going to have decent transit in the GTA if GO or whoever takes over those services don't stop designing their entire service around 9 to 5 commuters.

They're broadening their service base to include 8-4 commuters...what more could you possibly want?

 

[kettal]

GO is a very successful system and they have the highest cost recovery in North America and they want even higher. So they probably prefer to keep doing what they have always been doing, and so regional rail does not fit into their plans.

That's not true. The Go 2020 document says they don't plan to get greater cost recovery, and Metrolinx (which is now merged with GO) has several lines set to upgrade to regional express within 15 years.

 

[lead82]

Having the highest fare recovery in North America means GO is providing cattle-car service. It means there are not enough trains for the demand. Transit service is not meant to be profitable, it's meant to provide a service to the community. It's meant to allow people to get from the outer suburbs to the inner core easily and hassle free.

If we want to improve GO service we have to stop looking at the fare recovery as the only means to determine whether we should improve service. Providing regional rail service will obviously lower the fare recovery as you can never have all the trains full if service is provided all day in both directions.

Same thing is happening with the TTC. They're slowly realizing that fare recovery rates must come down if we want to build a great transit system. Service frequency and reliability are key here, fare recovery is not. Government should provide adequate subsidies to enable transit to be a viable option for everyone.

 

[Disparishun]

If we want to improve GO service we have to stop looking at the fare recovery as the only means to determine whether we should improve service.

Exactly. Some measure for GO's modal share of all-vehicle traffic along its routes is needed. We need a way of quantifying the fact that, along some corridors, its share of traffic is absolutely tiny.